CalgaryGrit: Stephane Dion in Bed with Exxon!

Monday, January 12, 2009

It makes sense, if the CEO of Exxon believes there is no chance of no regulation. If the options are "cap and trade" vs. "emissions tax", the latter is preferable because it has less of a dead-weight loss from the cost of managing the system.

Moreover, it may make sense for him to advocate for the less politically feasible solution. Big oil gets kudos for caring, while, in fact, pushing for an unpopular alternative that is also much more visible and easier to change, even if it is implemented (it is easy to eliminate taxes, but much harder to axe the bureaucracy a cap and trade system would create).

By french wedding cat, at 6:19 p.m.
'If the options are "cap and trade" vs. "emissions tax", the latter is preferable because it has less of a dead-weight loss from the cost of managing the system.'

I think, in a nutshell, that's the point of the post: when one puts all of the ridiculous, hyperbolic rhetoric about "schemes" and "taxes on everything" aside, a carbon tax is, in general, a more efficient method of reducing emissions.

By Anonymous, at 7:31 p.m.

Monday, January 12, 2009